Affirmed

S. Ct. Docket:

Cert. Granted:

2/20/2007

Argument Date:

10/30/2007

Question Presented:

Whether the “civil rights restored” provision of 18 U.S.C. §921(a)(20) applies to a conviction for which a defendant was not deprived of his civil rights thereby precluding such a conviction as a predicate offense under the Armed Career Criminal Act, 18 U.S.C. §924(e)(1)?

7th Cir. Opinion:

453 F.3d 804,   05-4722

7th Cir. Panel:

Easterbrook, Rovner, Evans

S. Ct. Opinion:

Date Decided:

12/4/2007

---

Case Name:  Wright v. Van Patten

Reversed

S. Ct. Docket:

Cert. Granted:

1/4/2008

Argument Date:

None

Question Presented:

Whether the state appellate court's determination that the defendant's right to counsel was not violated when defense counsel appeared by speaker phone at plea hearing was not contrary to, or an unreasonable application of, clearly established federal law.

7th Cir. Opinion:

 489 F.3d 827, 04-1276

7th Cir. Panel:

Coffey, Evans, Williams

S. Ct. Opinion:

Date Decided:

1/7/2008

---

Case Name:  Crawford v. Marion County Election Board

Affirmed

S. Ct. Docket:

Cert. Granted:

9/25/2007

Argument Date:

1/9/2008

Question Presented:

Whether an Indiana statute mandating that those seeking to vote in-person produce a government-issued photo identification violates the First and Fourteenth Amendments to the United States Constitution.

7th Cir. Opinion:

 472 F.3d 949,  06-2218

7th Cir. Panel:

Posner, Evans, Sykes

S. Ct. Opinion:

Date Decided:

4/28/2008

---

Case Name:  CBOS West, Inc. v. Humphries

Affirmed

S. Ct. Docket:

Cert. Granted:

9/25/2007

Argument Date:

2/20/2008

Question Presented:

Is a race retaliation claim cognizable under 42 U.S.C. § 1981?

7th Cir. Opinion:

 474 F.3d 387, 05-4047

7th Cir. Panel:

Easterbrook, Posner, Williams

S. Ct. Opinion:

128 S. Ct. 1951

Date Decided:

5/27/2008

---

Case Name:  United States v. Santos

Affirmed

S. Ct. Docket:

Cert. Granted:

4/23/2007

Argument Date:

10/3/2007

Question Presented:

The principal federal money laundering statute, 18 U.S.C. 1956(a)(1), makes it a crime to engage in a financial transaction using the “proceeds” of certain specified unlawful activities with the intent to promote those activities or to conceal the proceeds. The question presented is whether “proceeds” means the gross receipts
from the unlawful activities or only the profits, i.e., gross receipts less expenses.

7th Cir. Opinion:

 461 F.3d 886,  04-4221

7th Cir. Panel:

Manion, Kanne, Rovner

S. Ct. Opinion:

Date Decided:

6/2/2008

---

Case Name:  Bridge v. Phoenix Bond & Indemnity Co.

Affirmed

S. Ct. Docket:

Cert. Granted:

1/4/2008

Argument Date:

4/14/2008

Question Presented:

Whether reliance is a required element of a RICO claim predicated on mail fraud and, if it is, wether that reliance must be by the plaintiff.

7th Cir. Opinion:

 477 F.3d 928,   06-1160

7th Cir. Panel:

Easterbrook, Posner, Evans

S. Ct. Opinion:

Date Decided:

6/9/2008